Get Rid Of The Electoral College?

The C Bags scored more points than the Lakers in the 2010 Finals. Lakers won 4 games to 3, but overall the C Bags scored more points. C Bags should be the champs.

Okay, I don't know if they really scored more points, but I'm trying to paint a picture of why this thought process is flawed.

I hear the Left saying we don't need an Electoral College. Here is why we do need one: Election rigging is easy to do if it's simply "most votes wins." Hillary would have won by about 250,000 votes. It would be so easy for a state like Texas to add in 300,000 votes and get Trump a win. With the Electoral College, the election rigging has to be in many more places (harder to do, easier to get caught). Also, looking at the map, it's all red except for the big cities. Do we really want 5 cities dictating the election? Even California had more counties voting for Trump than Hillary.

I think to get rid of the Electoral College you'd need 2/3 of the states to vote in favor of it. Hillary only won 17 states. It's simply not gonna happen anytime soon.

Having said all of that, I do think it's odd that the person with the most votes didn't win.

Lastly, the Left is trying to get the Electoral voters to vote for Hillary. If you want Republicans to join the riots, this is how you do it.

 

When I was younger (early 20's) I thought popular vote was the way to go. But As I get older, I realize the genius of the electoral college. Like most people said, California and New York would determine the way government is ran for everyone in the nation. We need to remember that we have a union of states. The Constitution is to "form a more perfect union" which isn't the case if you have essentially the producers in the middle of the country having their lives dictated by the consumers and more service oriented areas on the coasts. The economies, needs, types of people...they are different. If you went to a straight popular vote that essentially turned all of middle America into a vast wasteland of people who work to provide for their governing overlords on the coast, how long until you think our union will last? I mean, the middle of America just pushed Donald Trump into the White House because they are sick of how things are now. How pissed do you think they would get in another 4-5 elections of having zero say? There would be civil war...and just remember where all the guns are.

 

I said this in my original response, but didn't want to incite anyone. (not that you did). But I agree. It's real. People are stocking up for the next civil war. And those laughing and saying that's nonsense are the ones who will lose.

 

Yeah. I'm not trying to incite anyone. Heck no. I'm a semi-conservative dude living in a midnight blue state. I don't want to have to flee to Texas under the darkness of night. I am just pointing out that people in the middle of the country are stocking up like crazy on weapons. And if they were ignored long enough by the coastal cities, they'd revolt.

 

Hunger Games here we come!

 

The other side. I don't know which is correct, but I lean more towards each individual having an equal vote.

 

Democratic Party presidential primaries, 2008

2004 ←
January 3 to June 3, 2008 → 2012

Candidate Barack Obama Hillary Clinton
Home state Illinois New York
Delegate count 2,272.5 1,978
Contests won 33 23
Popular vote 17,584,692 17,857,501
Percentage 47.3% 48.0%



Where was the outrage in 08? Hillary beat Obama 48 to 47 percent and had 300,000 more votes.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries,_2008

 

I would be shocked to find any hypocrisy among the Democrats.

 

You, Barns, and a couple others that like Bernie were upset (rightfully so), but the outrage from the Left pales in comparison to Trump winning. where was the thread asking if Super delegates should be abandoned ? where was the 7 days (and counting) of protests and riots? where was Soros?

Selective outrage, IMO.

 

No, I don't need to refute your specific point. You may even be right, I haven't looked at it. My response was more along the lines of "If you haven't found any hypocrisy you aren't looking closely enough." Both parties swim in an ocean of hypocrisy so it's much harder to not find any than it is to find some.

 

I doubt it could get 10 states, let alone 38.

Despite all my arguments in favor of the Electoral College, I'll say it again: seems weird to me to have the winner receive less votes.

 

Another thing to consider, if it was a straight popular vote, they would have campaigned differently. Who knows how the popular vote turns out if both candidates were required to campaign in all 50 states? Does Trump get more votes in CA and NY? Does Hillary get more votes in Alabama and Arkansas?